Hook Camping Suggestion
I'm sure there have been dozens of other suggestion threads related to this topic, but figured I would throw my 2 cents (maybe even just a penny) into the topic as well. Though I doubt there will be any changes made to the system, I would be interested in others' takes on this topic. However, if you aren't going to read through the entirety of this suggestion and provide constructive criticism from either how this could be improved or how the change would negatively impact the game (from a social and/or gameplay element), please don't bother responding.
Here is the problem as I see it. One of survivors' core objectives is altruism, with one of the primary ways of getting points in this category being to (safely) rescue other survivors from hooks. The killer is not actively incentivized by the points system to camp the hook. In fact, if other survivors notice an (essentially) impossible camping scenario to win (e.g., basement Bubba) and just complete generators, both sides end the game with poor scores/blood points. However, altruism in this scenario would punish the survivors and rewards the killer, leading to more hits/hooks/sacrifices/blood points. So, this creates an incentive for survivors to ignore what would be considered "normal gameplay" and to instead just sit on generators. There has to be a very small percent of the player base that has fun playing "generator simulator" and "hook watcher," right?
While there are certainly times where pushing other survivors away from the hook is warranted (e.g., punishing a late hook rescue and forcing a second state, punishing greedy rescues while being chased, etc.), it seems pretty clear that the abuse of this system results in poor gameplay interaction between the killer and survivors and also promotes negative social interactions (BMing, post-game chat insults, ect.). As such, it makes sense that the abuse of hook camping should be discouraged in some way while still allowing it as an option for the killer.
My proposed recommendation would be a system where while the killer remains without "X" meters of a hooked survivor and is NOT engaged in a chase with an unhooked survivor, breaking pallets, or other "normal" gameplay that they slowly become blind and deaf over "Y" seconds (let's say 30?). After the hooked survivor is rescued, the affliction would dissipate after "Z" seconds (3-5?) In my mind, this would almost exclusively punish the negative behavior while having a minimal affect on the more normative gameplay.
Now, I am sure that there are ways this could be exploited by survivors that I am not thinking of, but it seems like a reasonable change in my mind, even if some tweaks are needed overall.
Suggested Improvements (Feedback):
Negative Game Impacts (Feedback):
Comments
-
i imagine it could work like uhh,, nurse or legion. You sit within a proximity of like idk 8-16m outside of chase, your vision gets really black and eventually they begin to look down then get in stun for a brief few seconds, like a pallet, this could pretty much counter bubba basement or makes any camping m1's redundant.
0 -
These type of suggestions will not work without survivors using it as a bully tool.
0 -
No.
Camping simply does not need to be punished by the game. A camping killer will lose gens as long as the other survivors don't feed the camping killer.
0 -
That would be absolutely brutal to play with as killer when you're strategically forced to camp or proxy, and the competitive scene would be destroyed. Or, it'd be too small a range to matter.
If the killer's ability to camp or tunnel gets nerfed, survivors would need to be nerfed as well. You could make Camaraderie or something similar base-kit maybe, but then you'd likely have to slow down gens. I don't think there's any good solution to this issue right now, and you CAN still counter camping, and especially tunneling. Yeah if it's a Bubba 1 survivor has to die for 3 to escape, but keep doing that and eventually Bubba will get sick of losing and actually try.
Another issue would be that killers would have no way to punish toxic gameplay. Survivor goes out of their way to make your game miserable, you can't do much about it, and they'd know it. Yes, I'm sure people are going to say "well just win" but winning every game is just unrealistic, and frankly, if you don't want to get facecamped in that scenario, stop antagonizing the killer.
As for the ones that just get salty and camp when they're outplayed, again, keep 3 outing them and they'll get tired of it. It sucks, but what else can be done that doesn't affect game balance?
0 -
Thank you for providing this thoughtful response. I get the overall sentiment here and 100% agree with parts. My crude suggestion would clearly need a number of conditions applied to it and significant play testing to make sure that this cannot be abused, but that is also why I provided variables for the parameters in the suggestion. I'm also not set on the specific solution. Instead, maybe something like preventing 1-hit downs within 10 meters of the hook or something (though I am sure that has it's own problems that would need to be worked around). Whatever the solution, I do believe that by not penalizing this behavior it results in a negative impact on the game (both from the gameplay in certain matches and especially from overall toxicity of the player base).
As most everyone is aware, there is a (relatively) small group of people playing this game that specifically wants to make the game play less fun for the other side. This is purely anecdotal from my experience, but I would say 1 in 20 killers will make it clear that they have no care for the blood points and just want to make someone(s) angry through their camping (e.g., continuously slashing someone on the hook, standing directly in front and nodding the entire time, etc.). This is specifically the kind of camping that I am trying to find a way to discourage since it provides absolutely no utility to the gameplay (same thoughts for macro-flashlight-clicking). Obviously, the tricky line is to do this without affecting normal gameplay/camping, like: securing a kill at end game, pushing a second state, etc.
There is always going to be something that either side can do to be a dick, but I think it is important to recognize that this is at least a problem. If we are in agreement on that point, does it hurt to try to brainstorm ways that the problem could be solved with having a minimal impact on game balance for the vast majority of players? I would hope there could be some reasonable solution.
0 -
Oh sad days. I had what I believed to be a well-thought-out discussion, but apparently deleted it when I tried to edit it? Sad days. Thank you for the thoughtful response. I may try to regurgitate my thoughts on it again tomorrow.
0 -
Ouch, I was wondering why I couldn't get back here. That's a shame. I hope my reply was able to help a bit at least. Looking forward to seeing 2.0 tomorrow lol
0
